He next states that his work was suggested by the disgrace which the realm had sustained from the grievous loss of the kingdom of France, the duchies of Normandy, Gascony, and Guienne, and the counties of Maine and Ponthieu; which had been recovered by the French party, headed by Charles the Seventh, in the course of fifteen months, and chiefly during the year 1450. To inspire a just indignation of such a reverse, he recalls all the ancestral glories of the English nation, from their first original in the ancient blood of Troy, and through all the triumphs of the Saxons, Danes, Normans, and Angevyns. Of the Romans in England he says nothing, though in his subsequent pages he draws much from Roman history.
The next chapter sets forth how every man of worship in arms should resemble the lion in disposition, being eager, fierce, and courageous. In illustration of this it may be remarked, that Froissart, when describing the battle of Poictiers, says of the Black Prince, "The Prince of Wales, who was as courageous and cruel as a lion, took great pleasure this day in fighting and chasing his enemies." So our first Richard is still popularly known by his martial epithet of Cœur de Lyon: and that the lion was generally considered the fit emblem of knightly valour is testified by its general adoption on the heraldic shields of the highest ranks of feudal chivalry. The royal house of England displayed three lions, and the king of beasts was supposed to be peculiarly symbolic of their race—
Your brother Kings and monarchs of the earth
Do all expect that you should rouse yourself
As did the former Lions of your Blood.
Shakspere's Henry V. Act I. scene 1.
In the following chapter the author proceeds to describe "how the French party began first to offend, and break the truce." This truce had been concluded at Tours on the 28th of May 1444. The French are stated to have transgressed it first by capturing certain English merchant-men on the sea; and next by taking as prisoners various persons who bore allegiance to the English king. Of such are enumerated sir Giles son of the duke of Bretagne[[1]]; sir Simon Morhier, the
provost of Paris, taken at Dieppe[[2]]; one Mansel an esquire, taken on the road between Rouen and Dieppe, in January 1448-9[[3]]; and the lord Fauconberg, taken at Pont de l'Arche on the 15th May 1449.[[4]] The writer is careful to state that these acts of aggression on the part of the French, or some of them, were committed "before the taking of Fugiers," for it was by that action that the English party had really brought themselves into difficulty.[[5]]
There is next discussed (p. [6]) "a question of great charge and weight, whether it be lawful to make war upon Christian blood." This is determined upon the authority of a book entitled The Tree of Batailes, a work which had evidently already acquired considerable popularity whilst still circulated in manuscript only,
and which so far retained its reputation when books began to be multiplied by the printing-press as to be reproduced on several occasions. Our author frequently recurs to it, but his references do not agree with the book as it now remains; and it is remarkable that he attributes it, not to Honoré Bonnet its real author,[[6]] but to one dame Christine, whom he describes (see his note in p. [54]) as an inmate of the house of religious ladies at Passy near Paris. It would seem, therefore, that he made use of a somewhat different book, though probably founded on the celebrated work of Honoré Bonnet.